Tweet
IMPLICATIONS OF ASSOCIATION AGREEMENT DEAL DEPEND ON CONTENT, SAYS EX-MINISTER
20:55 21.08.13
A former Armenian minister of defense thinks any implications of
the Association Agreement (which is to be initialed later this year)
depend upon the text on the table.
In an interview with Tert.am, Vagharshak Harutyunyan said negative
effects will be inevitable in case the document contains conflicting
provisions in terms of the Armenian-Russian cooperation.
Dear Mr Harutyunyan, we already hear the ruling Republic Party of
Armenia say that Armenia is ready to initial the EU Association
Agreement in case nothing out of the ordinary happens. What do you
think will be the implications in terms of military security and
economy? I mean the possible steps by Russia.
The implications will depend on the document's content. If there
are clauses conflicting with the Armenian-Russian agreements and
creating obstacles to a future cooperation with the Customs Unions
or otherwise conflicting with Russia's interests, the consequences
will be definitely negative.
[Director of the CIS Countries Institute] Kostantin Zatulin has
said in an interview with Tert.am that he is not aware of the text
under negotiation but is quite familiar with the agreement signed
with Ukraine.
The negative implications will address all the possible sectors -
political, economic and military, and the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict
settlement will be naturally an integral part of that. Our diplomatic
success today is linked to first of all the military balance which we
ensure through the partnership relations with Russia. If not Russia's
support - also in the economic sector (energy, transport, job market,
transfers etc.) - our economic situation would me more serious,
preventing us to ensure the development of Karabakh. And the paces
of migration would be higher, causing serious security concerns also
for Armenia.
On the other hand, Armenian politicians say Armenia, together with
Karabakh, cannot simultaneously integrate into both systems - the
Eurasian Union and the EU. And there is a zero difference in that
case, with Karabakh not being involved in the process. Do you think
there are differing details in case of the Eurasian [Union] and the EU?
Yes, there are. To understand whether or not there is a difference,
we must first of all evaluate the situation today. Who assists
in the security of Karabakh and our economic developments? The EU
role is little in such efforts, reduced to zero as far as security
is concerned. Membership in the Eurasian Union will reinforce
Armenia's economic development, strengthening also Karabakh. As
for the initialing of the Association Agreement, it will have no
security impact. Economically, it will be zero even in case of the
most optimistic assessments.
Russia is known to have sold 1 billion Dollars worth weapons to
Azerbaijan. For the pro-Russian circles in Armenia, the fact became
an extra argument substantiating the need of the Eurasian integration.
Russian experts say in their comments that Azerbaijan had some way
or another to buy the weapon from a third country.
Russia has committed itself - under the agreement "On the Russian
Military Base" - to supplying Armenia with weapons. After the provision
took effect, the arms race between Azerbaijan and Armenia switched
over to the Azerbaijani-Russian domain. For Russia, this is a pointless
race likely to lead only to an economic collapse. Military operations
in the region are strongly against the Russian interest.
That's self-evident. So, with all this in mind, the reasons behind
the weapons sale fall into place. Strengthening its influence on
Azerbaijan while gaining advantages from the deal, Russia provides
Armenia with equipment of a corresponding quantity and type and thus
maintains the military balance. The concerns would be well-timed had
Russia failed to fulfill its obligations under the agreement.
What can you say about Russian President Vladimir Putin's visit to
Azerbaijan, which was aimed the expansion of bilateral ties and the
signing of military cooperation documents?
If you closely look at the documents signed in Baku, you will see
there is no serious accord in political-military terms. It is very
noteworthy that Putin did not visit their Pantheon. This is an
important fact. When Aliyev voiced tough remarks, saying that the
territories in Karabakh are "under occupation" and so on, Putin gave
a brief response, i.e. - the Karabakh issue will have only a peaceful
solution. The statement by the Russian president contains also another
message: that Russia does not accept a military solution.
Do you think the initialing [of the Agreement] will cause Russia to
decrease its economic investments in Armenia?
If Armenia signs a document conflicting with Russian-Armenian
agreements and the Russian interest, undesirable consequences will
be inevitable.
Armenian News - Tert.am
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress
20:55 21.08.13
A former Armenian minister of defense thinks any implications of
the Association Agreement (which is to be initialed later this year)
depend upon the text on the table.
In an interview with Tert.am, Vagharshak Harutyunyan said negative
effects will be inevitable in case the document contains conflicting
provisions in terms of the Armenian-Russian cooperation.
Dear Mr Harutyunyan, we already hear the ruling Republic Party of
Armenia say that Armenia is ready to initial the EU Association
Agreement in case nothing out of the ordinary happens. What do you
think will be the implications in terms of military security and
economy? I mean the possible steps by Russia.
The implications will depend on the document's content. If there
are clauses conflicting with the Armenian-Russian agreements and
creating obstacles to a future cooperation with the Customs Unions
or otherwise conflicting with Russia's interests, the consequences
will be definitely negative.
[Director of the CIS Countries Institute] Kostantin Zatulin has
said in an interview with Tert.am that he is not aware of the text
under negotiation but is quite familiar with the agreement signed
with Ukraine.
The negative implications will address all the possible sectors -
political, economic and military, and the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict
settlement will be naturally an integral part of that. Our diplomatic
success today is linked to first of all the military balance which we
ensure through the partnership relations with Russia. If not Russia's
support - also in the economic sector (energy, transport, job market,
transfers etc.) - our economic situation would me more serious,
preventing us to ensure the development of Karabakh. And the paces
of migration would be higher, causing serious security concerns also
for Armenia.
On the other hand, Armenian politicians say Armenia, together with
Karabakh, cannot simultaneously integrate into both systems - the
Eurasian Union and the EU. And there is a zero difference in that
case, with Karabakh not being involved in the process. Do you think
there are differing details in case of the Eurasian [Union] and the EU?
Yes, there are. To understand whether or not there is a difference,
we must first of all evaluate the situation today. Who assists
in the security of Karabakh and our economic developments? The EU
role is little in such efforts, reduced to zero as far as security
is concerned. Membership in the Eurasian Union will reinforce
Armenia's economic development, strengthening also Karabakh. As
for the initialing of the Association Agreement, it will have no
security impact. Economically, it will be zero even in case of the
most optimistic assessments.
Russia is known to have sold 1 billion Dollars worth weapons to
Azerbaijan. For the pro-Russian circles in Armenia, the fact became
an extra argument substantiating the need of the Eurasian integration.
Russian experts say in their comments that Azerbaijan had some way
or another to buy the weapon from a third country.
Russia has committed itself - under the agreement "On the Russian
Military Base" - to supplying Armenia with weapons. After the provision
took effect, the arms race between Azerbaijan and Armenia switched
over to the Azerbaijani-Russian domain. For Russia, this is a pointless
race likely to lead only to an economic collapse. Military operations
in the region are strongly against the Russian interest.
That's self-evident. So, with all this in mind, the reasons behind
the weapons sale fall into place. Strengthening its influence on
Azerbaijan while gaining advantages from the deal, Russia provides
Armenia with equipment of a corresponding quantity and type and thus
maintains the military balance. The concerns would be well-timed had
Russia failed to fulfill its obligations under the agreement.
What can you say about Russian President Vladimir Putin's visit to
Azerbaijan, which was aimed the expansion of bilateral ties and the
signing of military cooperation documents?
If you closely look at the documents signed in Baku, you will see
there is no serious accord in political-military terms. It is very
noteworthy that Putin did not visit their Pantheon. This is an
important fact. When Aliyev voiced tough remarks, saying that the
territories in Karabakh are "under occupation" and so on, Putin gave
a brief response, i.e. - the Karabakh issue will have only a peaceful
solution. The statement by the Russian president contains also another
message: that Russia does not accept a military solution.
Do you think the initialing [of the Agreement] will cause Russia to
decrease its economic investments in Armenia?
If Armenia signs a document conflicting with Russian-Armenian
agreements and the Russian interest, undesirable consequences will
be inevitable.
Armenian News - Tert.am
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress